Totally spot on and correct. It is indisputable that there could be no EUA issued if there were alternate and effective treatments against a disease or an illness. The only reason for demonizing and suppressing information about drugs or treatments like ivermectin and ivermectin-based protocols was because all along, from the beginning, …
Totally spot on and correct. It is indisputable that there could be no EUA issued if there were alternate and effective treatments against a disease or an illness. The only reason for demonizing and suppressing information about drugs or treatments like ivermectin and ivermectin-based protocols was because all along, from the beginning, the “elites” and our wannabe rulers wanted was to inflict the experimental injections not our society in the US but on the world at large.
The only way to address this properly is to convene and hold “Nuremberg 2.0” trials for crimes against humanity. Those found guilty in a court of law of committing crimes against humanity must be executed
And the EUA also removed all liability from the jab manufacturers so they would be impervious to lawsuits from injured parties. Their supply contracts with individual countries also had non-disclosure clauses to keep a lid on such facts, at least on the couple of docs I saw released by whistleblowers.
Totally spot on and correct. It is indisputable that there could be no EUA issued if there were alternate and effective treatments against a disease or an illness. The only reason for demonizing and suppressing information about drugs or treatments like ivermectin and ivermectin-based protocols was because all along, from the beginning, the “elites” and our wannabe rulers wanted was to inflict the experimental injections not our society in the US but on the world at large.
The only way to address this properly is to convene and hold “Nuremberg 2.0” trials for crimes against humanity. Those found guilty in a court of law of committing crimes against humanity must be executed
And the EUA also removed all liability from the jab manufacturers so they would be impervious to lawsuits from injured parties. Their supply contracts with individual countries also had non-disclosure clauses to keep a lid on such facts, at least on the couple of docs I saw released by whistleblowers.
You are correct. Thank you for adding that fact to the post.